Why Lutfur wants to sell Old Flo

A lot has been written about the forthcoming sale of the Henry Moore sculpture, the Draped Seated Woman, or Old Flo as it is better known, but a crucial element has also been missed.

At tonight’s Tower Hamlets council cabinet, Mayor Lutfur Rahman overruled the concerns of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and confirmed his decision to sell the bronze.

Of course, he made the oh-so-sincere noises about it wrenching his heart – but that the Coalition cuts gave him no choice.

There are two aspects to this.

During his mayoral election campaign of 2010, Lutfur produced leaflets saying he was the Great Saviour of East End Heritage. In reality, these leaflets, detailing his apparent one man campaign to save Bancroft History Library in 2008, were aimed at the white working class voters (as they are termed in the divisive world of Tower Hamlets politics); they were a direct counter to the accusations that he cared only about the Bengali community or the East London Mosque influenced vote. (I wrote about the history revisionism here.)

So his love of heritage stretches only so far, it seems. Those who applauded his boasts about Bancroft might now want to engage in their own revisionism.

However, that’s not really the main point. Lutfur’s love of heritage is nothing compared with his love of power. In May 2014, he will be seeking four more years.

However, when you’re in power you have access to far larger funds than those offered by the likes of Haque: our tax money.

You see, away from most prying eyes, Lutfur has recently embarked on a massive vote-buying programme with hundreds of small community groups and mosques as his targets. At October’s cabinet some £6million was set aside for the mainstream grants programme, which he almost alone controls, until 2015. I warned about his takeover of this grants programme last June, here.

At the October meeting, the cabinet tried to discuss the final grant allocations. However, because so many of the councillors were personally linked to the winning groups, half of the cabinet was ordered to leave the room.

I and a few others are going through the allocations and quite frankly it stinks. More will be published on this in due course (feel free to email or leave comments on the blog if you have further information by the way).

And one other important issue was discussed at that October meeting: Lutfur proposed to set aside another £2million for a three-year “Community Faith Building Support Scheme”. What this, you may ask? Well, it’s a lot of money that he wants to spend refurbishing the borough’s “faith buildings”.

Every faith building will be eligible to apply, but the big heritage churches needn’t bother; they have access to funds from elsewhere. No, the bulk of it is for the small mosques and community centres that occupy former shops all over the borough.

I’m extremely wary of state money being used for these purposes, but I can also see the potential for good if the funds are used to broaden the appeal of these community centres. Far too often they are inward looking and male dominated.

However, that’s for a separate discussion.

The point is that these two grants programmes are designed politically to secure support for Lutfur. If he generates 500 votes from from say 50 community centres/groups, that’s 25,000 votes in total. That will deliver him Mulberry Place once more.

So, it’s easy to understand why he is so keen to sell off Old Flo. He needs the money.

[By the way, for what it’s worth, here are my thoughts on Old Flo. I’ve never seen it, I have no emotional attachment to it at all. It’s been up in Yorkshire since 1997 and as long as some people actually do see it, then fine.

Personally, if some solution could be found to bring it to Tower Hamlets, I think that would be great. I know that Morpeth School in Bethnal Green offered it a home. I think that would have been wonderful.

However, I have little sympathy with the demands of Danny Boyle and others to place it for free in the Olympic Park. If the Olympic Park wants it, let them pay us for it. They took the Olympic marathon away from us, remember… .

If there are no covenants attached to the sculpture, then I don’t see why the council should not sell and raise some money. I just hope the money is spent wisely.]

And if anyone is wondering what the heck all this Old Flo business is, I recommend reading this piece in last Sunday’s Observer by Stepney’s brilliant architecture critic Rowan Moore.

Here’s a sample:

The work is Henry Moore‘s Draped Seated Woman, and the proposal is to sell it to the highest bidder, to fill some of the gap, they say, made by government spending cuts. Councillor Shahed Ali, one of Rahman’s cabinet members, told the BBC that “we’d love to keep it in the borough”, but it is “uninsurable”, at a time when large bronzes like this are sometimes stolen for their scrap value.

The proposal has aroused the fury of, among others, Henry Moore’s daughter Mary, the local MP Rushanara Ali, and Danny Boyle, hero of the Olympic opening ceremony. In a letter to the Observer today, they write that it “goes against the spirit” of Henry Moore, who sold it to London County Council at a price – £6,000 – far below its then market value. It demonstrated the “belief that everyone, whatever their background, should have access to works of art of the highest quality”.

Moore, they say, was “delighted” that it was installed as the centrepiece of the Stifford estate, a group of tower blocks in Stepney. Boyle says that “it represents everything I believe in”. He and his fellow objectors are right: Draped Seated Woman fulfils an ideal that nothing was too good for ordinary people, an ideal that modern local politicians are in danger of losing. To sell the sculpture as if it were a piece of real estate would be, according to Rushanara Ali, “a betrayal of working class heritage”. It would also betray Moore’s generosity. It would raise the question why anyone should ever want to offer anything to a local authority again.

The piece itself, which acquired the nickname Old Flo, is noble and touching. It is 3 metres high and weighs 1.6 tonnes, but there is still a lightness with which the figure of the woman sits on a low plinth, delicacy in the fall of drapery on her body, and a springy alertness in her pose. It is beautifully made. Placed amid tower blocks, it was a rare moment of quality, a sign that someone cared. It was also accessible – children could play on and around it, and residents could see it from their kitchens. No doubt it was inscrutable to some, and uninteresting to others, but as long as it was there it created the possibility that some might be inspired, intrigued, or provoked into seeing the world in a different way.

It sat on the Stifford until 1997, when the estate was demolished and the sculpture was moved to Yorkshire Sculpture Park, allegedly temporarily. It has remained there ever since, while plans have come and gone to, for example, relocate it to Canary Wharf. Lutfur Rahman has tried to sell it once before, when he was leader of the council, but was stopped. Now, with the greater powers of an elected mayor, he is trying again.

Share this: Facebook & Twitter

Like this:

Related

39 Responses

An absolutely dreadful decision. Utterly wrong. Did email Mayor Rahman and mentioned Moore’s drawings of Liverpool Street underground shelterers and the significance of his post-war gift to heavily bombed Stepney. Also how legendary WW2 ‘Mickey’s Shelter’ in the nearby London Fruit and Wool Exchange of Spitalfields is another ‘heritage asset’ that will be lost (in this case destroyed) as council officers deem the ‘benefits’ outweigh the heritage losses.

Back in 1991, there was a similar negative reaction when the ‘London from Southwark’ (c. 1650) painting – which was found at Bancroft, but gifted to Whitechapel Library was sold. That started at an auction house and then after a furore similar to this, was sold to the Museum of London for (reputedly) a quarter of a million. Wasn’t that enough of a scandal, then?

Hmmm – the last time a few Councillors in London thought it was a bright idea to try and buy votes they ended up:
* embroiled in a very long inquiry and several court cases which went on for years,
* paying a very great deal in legal fees
* certain councillors and top officials were charged with being jointly and severally liable for repayment of the sums expended – which ran to several million pounds
* a very large amount of money was recovered through due legal process

Plus the allegedly impregnable boss of the Council ended up having to dispose of her assets and left the Country.

Bit of a tenuous link to connect Old Flo with The Despicable Rahman’s need for an election war chest Ted, but I agree with both points seperately.

I wasn’t aware that the date for the next mayoral election was as close as 2014. Surely the most important thing is for everyone to get out there and vote for someone other than Rahman. He got the mayoral seat because of widespread voter apathy (turnout was minimal) and corrupt voting patterns. What can be done to counter both of these issues in 2014?

I have said it before and I will say it again, Labour needs to pull their fingers out if they want Lutfur out.

Speaking with a Labour Cllr he agreed that they should have also targeted Mosques – but please for all those who like blaming the bloody Bengali/Muzzies, we are not the majority in this borough!!!

Targeting Mosques for votes – nothing wrong as other parts of the country, white folk target their local churches but giving them funding is like buying votes I agree….. again, not a Bengali/Muslim only problem in London.

Labour need to stop pandering to us Bengali’s like they did last time by putting Abbas as leader, a useless fool of a man when it should have been Josh Peck or Biggs.

Lutfur sent a letter last month to all households saying he has saved some money in the TH pot to make sure that anyone who loses out on council tax benefit due to new rules, the council will cover…. now that is another big vote winner.

Giving large grants to Osmani Centre and their offshoot, The Roots Forum (in Alibor’s Ward) recently will secure the young Muslim vote and there are a lot of them who will be under the influence of ‘Labour and the whites were racist against a Muslim Bengali’ during the 2010 labour mayor nomination, I would have been aggrieved to because Labour cocked up badly there.

BUT again, Bengalis are not the majority in the borough so the majority non-Bengalis/Muslims need to be mobilised (I can hear some people thinking ‘what about those 15 ghost residents in a bedsit registered to vote) with all the talk of police investigation and the man with no neck coming down to fix our rotten borough ‘Pickles’ nothing seems to be happening.

For an incompetent bunch, they have been pretty clever in the way they won and look like to win again, unless the MAJORITY of those in TH come out to vote.

What on earth has “faith” got to do with the proper running of a local authority?? Surely this is discriminating against those who don’t have faith? I am an atheist and I object to any of the money I am forced to pay the (supposedly secular) local authority being redistributed to those who follow a particular religion (or religions) which I do no share or participate in and to be honest totally disagree with at a fundamental level. Can the national secular society do something about this? Lutfur’s cronies and apparently systematic redistribution of public money for the sole benefit one religious/ethnic groups is just racism dressed up as something else.

Should we mix government and religion? Is the council really just a bigoted theocracy dressed up as a sham-democracy? Is the message these mosques give out approved word for word by the council? Can we have a transcript please? In return for these religious institutions benefiting from non religious (and non Muslims) money I think as a precondition the council should fund non-Muslim observers to be posted in each of these Mosques at all times to record what is said therein and assess whether what is said is inclusive, tolerant, gay friendly, christian-friendly, Jewish friendly, women-friendly and modern and therefore suitable for a local authority to be promoting.

Yeah, good points – there is a lot wrapped up in the whole “Faith” agenda in LBTH. And the fact that Lutfur so blatently targets Muslims (indeed, the fact that his powerbase is almost entirely Muslim – although I await correction on this point) does both him and Muslims a disservice.

Sheraz, you are making fundamental misunderstandings. A summer fête is typically organised by the Parish Council and this is a civil organisation with no connection with the Church of England. It is not pretty much the same thing. This plan is giving money from me (a council tax payer and an atheist) to refurbish a religious building (e.g. a mosque) owned by others. Yes money is raised for charitable causes such as repairing a church roof or subsidising the local school at Summer fètes and fayres (etc) but these events are free entry, there is no compulsion to pay anything and attendees can decide whether or not to give some money to a charitable cause given space therein. Paying council tax is compulsory. We should I in effect pay for the religion of others? This is totally wrong and I think it could be grounds for withholding council tax.

It seems this is going to go around the world. Whether it’s for ‘young people’ (Cllr. Shahed Ali) or ‘freezing pensioners’ (Cllr. Rania Khan) or “local heritage projects we can sustain” ! (TH website) or this Faith Scheme – or whatever – it is WRONG. And it is a worry that discussing why and who will benefit may hijack the whole issue. Perhaps this is what is wanted, too. Also, if the Mayor has tried to sell the sculpture before (when he was Leader – Rowan Moore writes) then this is less about the cuts here and now. Ted, could you substantiate what Rowan Moore is saying? When was this? As Leader or Lead Member for Culture?

And if proven, who was Head of Culture then? Was it Heather Bonfield? This is the woman who is taking over £800 a day our money and she says it is uninsurable? 2 and a half days of this Heather Bonfield would pay for one year’s insurance at Morpeth, yes? Or what about Bancroft Library, it could go in there with ‘The Sacrifice of Isaac’ painting. Our own Tower Hamlets museum – and then the other red herring of displaying it in an insecure park setting and therefore it’s “uninsurable”, can be dismissed.

I can bet you my bottom dollar, Dave Cameron and his friend George Osborne are working up ways to build up a pre-election war chest, very similar to what the Mayor is doing here. The Mayor is targeting his funding at his powerbase and similarly Dave Cam will be devising policies to buy the votes of his banking friends and other well to do folk.

The Mayor is being a politician and following in the British tradition of pre-election handouts. Let’s just keep it at that and not make it into something that it isn’t.

Observers last paragraph sums up to a ‘T’ what this has been and what I have been saying times on this blog since back in 2010 – yes the Mayor and his team are incompetent etc but what he is doing is what people in politics have always been doing for years.

He has just come to prominence PARTLY because some cannot stand an ethnic independent who has been able to change the political landscape in TH and claims of extremism and fundamentalism has been banded about for good measure along with that ‘old chestnut’ of the Muslims slowly taking over the world…. starting off with Tower Hamlets…. some of the stuff people come up with on Gilligans blog scares me about the intelligence of these people and whether they should be allowed anywhere near a keyboard!!!

It didn’t state either that Churches cannot apply but you may have seen the small print somewhere.

So the fact that any faith group can apply for it, was your point that those non-Muslim organisations will not have a chance because the Mayor will make sure of that or were you saying that this new grant is just for Muslim organisations, even though advertised otherwise?

You probably know why I’m asking because from the past, you will realise I’m all for highlighting sneaky behaviour but not when all the details are not made apparant.

What would be good is to keep an eye on the grants, but more importantly an eye on ALL those who applied and those who were rejected.

That way you will be able to confirm how many non-Muslim orgs bothered applying and how many were rejected on what grounds.

My understanding from talking to someone involved in the scheme is that churches can of course apply but most are unlikely to receive funding because they are already heritage listed and have access to funds elsewhere.

I was told by this person that it is v much being driven to improve conditions for small mosques and their community centres.

A lot will depend on the person they pick to make the decisions/provide the advice.

OK – but if you look at it this way (and I’m not defending IF only Muslim orgs get funding) I think it’s fair to say that the most practiced faith on a daily basis in TH is that of the Islamic faith…. that’s not our fault, it’s just the way we are. Mosques are full to the brim every Friday compared to the few Churches left in TH on a Sunday.

That’s just demographics even though mentioned before that we are not the majority.

So the numbers of Muslim orientated org (I use the term orgs and not Mosques is because many orgs are just that places for the community where when its prayer time, people pray together and then get back to their activities. Groups of my friends sometimes pray together when we watching the footy at our house, but praying does not make our homes a Mosque, just a point) will way outnumber the number of other faith orgs applying.

So there is nothing sneaky there.

If for example 50 Muslim orgs applied and only 5 non-Muslim orgs applied and all were accepted applications…. would the Mayor and his cronies be blamed for this????

Which is why I hope in 6-12 months time you will be able to investigate using one of FOI thingies’ and see what really has happened!

No, I totally take your point. I think it’s a question of how the grants will be used. If the money is used for the benefit of the neighbouring community, that can only be good. But if used for the selfish use of an existing clique then that’d be a problem.

Well the grants clearly state the money is for making improvements to buildings itself which to me means if your comm premises is falling to bits etc.

Im all for benefitting the whole community but your point of the money used to benefit the wider is actually a different issue there because the grant is not being advertised specifically for that even though centres should welcome all groups ANYWAY.

For that the grant should be named ‘Community Grants for Faith Groups to promote Inclusivity’ or something of that nature.

Lets stick to the issue you originally highlighted, that of the mayor favouring Muslim orgs in the hope of getting/retaining votes.

No, the grants will be used to refurbish buildings, inside and out. Tatty buildings will qualify.

My understanding is that the original idea behind this was for applicants to demonstrate a wider benefit. That doesn’t necessarily mean inviting in people of different faiths but more that existing centres should become more open and diverse, eg women and children.

What about people without faith? What about them? Can secular buildings used by communities get money too? There are pubs closing every day and they need funding! They should be able to apply.

Local government has NO BUSINESS in promoting religion.

This is all a con anyway. Because in TH there is actually a racially directed form of wealth redistribution. Money is systematically transferred from “white folk” to people of Bengali heritage through the housing benefits and council tax benefits system already. “Whie folk” pay it. The others do not. This process will be grotestesquely accelerated in this blatant move which will take even more money from the public purse (mostly paid by “white folk” owned businesses in their rates and white folk who work and pay council tax) and just gift it to Bengali groups.

Imagine if all the remaining “white folk” suddenly left Tower Hamlets (I think 85% of them think about doing this every day) and all the money which that kleptocracy had to find had to come from taxing Bengali people in the borough.

Dour Shamelets said “This is all a con anyway. Because in TH there is actually a racially directed form of wealth redistribution. Money is systematically transferred from “white folk” to people of Bengali heritage through the housing benefits and council tax benefits system already. “Whie folk” pay it. The others do not. This process will be grotestesquely accelerated in this blatant move which will take even more money from the public purse (mostly paid by “white folk” owned businesses in their rates and white folk who work and pay council tax) and just gift it to Bengali groups.

Imagine if all the remaining “white folk” suddenly left Tower Hamlets (I think 85% of them think about doing this every day) and all the money which that kleptocracy had to find had to come from taxing Bengali people in the borough.

I suspect there would be a crisis.”

Absolutely, and the problem is wider spread than just LBTH; there is a net transfer of money from your so-called ‘white folks’ to ethnic minorities across the country. Pointing out that muslims generally claim welfare and benefits gets you labelled as ‘Islamophobic’ on here as it’s an uncomfortable truth which many would rather remained hidden (I’m looking at you Sheraz, amongst others.)

The problem in Tower Hamlets is that we have reached the stage where a corrupt mayor who favours his own people has risen to power, and is both abusing the electoral system to keep himself in place AND abusing the financial control he has to favour those of his ethnicity within the electorate. This stranglehold on power is hard ot break, and one wonders where it will all end.

As an ethnic minority (albeit of a different ethnicity to Rahman) I am disgusted at the tribal way in which he behaves, as it is so often assumed that if the Bangladeshis do it then all ‘ethnics’ must favour their own in a similar way. I am amazed that the Bangladeshi community can be so brazen about the situation.

Not an Islamophobe Tim… just an outright racist by blaming Bengali’s for all the troubles that happen in TH and surrounding areas.

If the “white folk” in TH all came out in force to vote, you might not have had Lutfur in power in the first place.

You call us lazy and one point you made was that ALL Bengalis in TH were on benefits, which is one of the most racist and cretinous comments ever made…. HOW DO YOU POSSIBLY KNOW ALL BENGALIS IN TH ARE JOBLESS.

Did that not show other people on here that you are racist and a little bit of a numpty, hence why you are coined ‘Time nice but Dim’.

Anyway going back to lazy and this was aimed at Dire Straits over there with us taking their “white folk money” (coincedentally us Bengalis do pay taxes too but that must be a white only speciality)…. the white folk who are eligible to vote, should get off their lazy arses and vote in 2014!!!!!

It has also been reported that Christ Church, Spitalfields, wants our Henry Moore sculpture. Christ Church who support the demolition of the 1929 Market Exchange and World War II ‘Mickey’s Shelter’? The rector of Christ Church even spoke in favour of this destruction of heritage and of Spitalfields Market while “requesting” developer’s planning obligations money:

Why are Christ Church entering into this? What kind of custodians are they for Tower Hamlets’ heritage, after this? Also, imagine how the hundreds of people who will have their livelihoods ruined by these demolitions feel – they were not even consulted as the rector was, let alone receive any “benefits” via developer’s payments as he and his church have gone for. The people in the Exchange and on the Market stalls will be devastated financially while there is gain for this church? Spitalfields Market and Tower Hamlets heritage belongs to all of us and destroying it, and the livelihoods of those who are currently employed in it, while also getting money out of it, is just repugnant. Especially when it is a church.

And this Faith Scheme is just another example of the problem of religious groups getting involved in local politics and receiving “benefits” out of others’ loss. Agree with Dour Shamlets and Ted on public money, our money, going to any religion in any “faith buildings” – it should not happen. Also, if you asked certain faith buildings who need restoration and also are heritage buildings – i.e. Nelson Street Synagogue – would they want this money from the selling-off of other Tower Hamlets’ heritage?

It has also been reported that Christie’s auctioneers are going to sell the Henry Moore. These are the same auctioneers who currently have our very valuable old master ‘Sacrifice of Isaac’ painting for ‘safe-keeping’. (As the East London Advertiser letters page revealed recently, after a local resident made enquiries to the council.) No co-incidence, surely. Obviously Christie’s have buyers lined up for the sculpture. And buyers for the Sacrifice of Isaac after that? Regardless, neither artwork belongs to the people who are selling it. And Christie’s should not take their instructions to sell. Someone has already written in the press that the sculpture is now tainted by the original sale conditions from Moore to the LCC. It isn’t just about covenants Ted, although this should be looked into – there is a bad feeling now about the selling of this particular piece and it will affect the price.

When the ‘London from Southwark’ painting went to an auction house in 1991, that had to be withdrawn from sale because of a similar question over gifting, ownership and a decision to sell being taken by an autocratic handful of people, without consultation or a mandate from the people of Tower Hamlets. That was a Liberal council and Globe Town Neighbourhood – yes, Ted? It then went to the Museum of London in a kind of ‘soft’ sale (not that this should happen to the sculpture, though.) Perhaps Christie’s should now come forward and make a statement about their involvement – their commission will amount to millions, surely. Also a public statement from the Mayor about this sale being on his agenda since 2008. That goes to the heart of this. If journalist Rowan Moore has this information, it would be good if he followed up…as we (TH residents) need to know.

Ted, for me, as a person who pays tax, without choice, the key question is surly, why in god’s name, is Tower Hamlets channelling money obtained from individuals, of up to £300k per grant into renovations of faith buildings. This is not a religious state this is a democracy in recession where people are hurting, really hurting and suffering and I simply cannot see any justification of diverting these much needed funds to paint bricks and mortar. These organisations should raise funds via community activities, perhaps ask the landlords to make changes but the taxpayer?!? , I regard this as being immoral in this climate. I cannot see in the real world, outside of LBTH politics how this can be acceptable.

Tower Hamlets has one of the highest levels of child poverty – let’s fix a faith building’s roof?
Many large families will be badly affected by the introduction of the universal credit; let’s give 300k to a religious organisation to fix the place up!
This must be an utter Joke! Day centres for older people in Bow could close; let’s paint some walls in a building used by a faith group. For 10K tower hamlets could produce a booklet explaining how these organisations can raise their own money, and get back to the business of local government.

Public Funds are precious and often come from the blood, sweat and tears of hard working people of all faiths, religions and backgrounds and should be spent with the greatest regard. Take care of the weakest in society in these times, and not of any political self-interest. It strikes me, how could any faith organisation wish to take public funds which could be used to support the poor and needy, to refurbish a mere building. Is this teaching of the many different faiths in Tower Hamlets?

This may sound I’m in support of Lutfur but just to add to the part where Wapping says ‘large families being affected by universal credit’ so why isn’t money going to them rather than faith buildings, the bloke is going to cover council tax benefit for all those affected in TH by those changes from a pot of £2m he has set aside specifically for this.

Reason I bring this up is because firstly to be partly balanced, but mainly to highlight that the man is starting to do everything ‘right’ in order to get re-elected!!!! Money on offer for those who want it for their buildings in return for votes perhaps, along with portraying himself as the saviour for those affected by the welfare room….. those people affected will likely vote for a man who is going to cover some of their benefit shortfall.

Moral of the story is that Labour will need ‘bring it’ hard and fast to make sure he does not get in again!!!!

I hope I didn’t irritate you too much earlier Sheraz because I suspect we share a similar disdain for the present situation. However in my view TH Labour cannot “bring it hard and fast”…they can only win elections in LBTH if they coincide with national elections. Otherwise in LBTH they are a busted flush. They have no ideas other than “let’s get power” (which by itself is not a vote winner) and no longer have a distinct ideological message that anybody can be loyal towards. The leadership is useless and in Spitalfields, on its own merits, TH Labour has not won an election in ages, having lost two by-elections in a row in what was supposedly their safest seat. They choose candidates based on a dogmatic and failed system of positive discrimination which means white men are bottom of the list and Bengali women are top…and this has resulted in such spectacular home-goals as Shelina Akhtar, Rania and Ribena Khan, Lutfa Begum and Pola Uddin – all of whom were selected because of their winning combination of race and gender which has an almost erotic appeal to idiotic interest groups within the “white folk” element of the THLP. The end result has been Labour councillors with no party loyalty and/or ones who are unfit for office and steal public money.

People in LBTH now tend to vote Labour purely as a means to stop someone WORSE from being elected… and this is hardly a positive endorsement of them or what they “stand for”. We are forced to choose between dumb and dumber at each election and it is just diabolical…I for one have totally given up on it/them and am at a loss as to who to vote for in future elections.

Right – consider this reply an over-arching one covering the history of discussions that took place on this blog since it began during the Mayoral elections which covers this current discussion.

I dont get irritated…. I get f**ked off when some people decide to go all Mitt Romney Republican on here and use the same crappy excuse right wing/borderline racists in the US of f**king A did… “we lost because the America your father knew is not the one of today, if it was not for the Latinos and blacks, we would have won”

BULL-SHIZZLE!!!!

Lutfur knows what he is doing, Labour added to that problem but why is that the fault of us Bengali voters in TH?

Why is that the fault of Muslim voters in TH?

The blame squarely lies with Labour, it does not lie with people who voted the way they wanted to. It does not lie with any Mosque, it does not lie with those who are offered grants, because anyone who is offered money will accept it in most circumstances.

So what if Lutfur is mobilising many of the Bengali vote, Labour could have done the same back in 2010 but they were too focussed on making sure Lutfur was out of the equation and that severely backfired…. Badly, when they should have focussed on selecting the right leader, which by way of vote I think was John Biggs but they again cocked up badly there and it was all downhill from there.

I will commend what Lutfur’s team did with that whole debacle and used it as a great weapon, that’s politics and he was clinical in how he made great gains from the ‘victim status’

Another point of ‘Bengali’s all on benefits, taking white folks taxes’ – that is a sweeping racist statement, there’s no discussion about it, problem is who with any shred of a brain cell could actually comprehend that “EVERY BENGALI IN TH IS ON BENEFITS”, when you read that statement…. does that not make you think the person who wrote it is basically prejudiced/racist, it’s on a similar vein to “all blacks are robbers”.

But anyway – give it another 10-15 years when the first to second generation Benagli’s die out of old age, or some welfare benefit related disease as some on here might elude to, which will leave the likes of us 3rd generation British born Benagli’s who in some peoples eyes, would be more educated and intelligent, more assimilated and integrated all those words closet racists love to hear about ‘us ethnics’….. but I can bet you that with all the new breed of voters, more apt and working out the bullcrap from the reality of what politicians say… unless Labour fix up, they would still vote the same way!

So to sum up the above as a response to Dour and others, don’t sit and spout bile about certain groups of people for using their democratic right to vote whichever way they want to… start to attack those who just sit and moan but don’t use their vote, start to attack the Labour leadership for being weak, that last part could be aimed at Ted et al, so busy with highlighting what is wrong with the bloke wont turn voters away from him because those voters who voted him along with many who didn’t vote, will not get to see your angle. The blog is mainly preaching to the converted minority.

Start to really get at Labour to make sure they are ready by 2014 to mount of proper campaign!!!

Chip on my shoulder – you’re going to make me use those acronyms I hate using…. LMFAO!!!!

Me with the chip, when a prat like you thinks all Bengalis are on benefits and everything you say is outright racist and I’m the one with the chip!!! LOL (s**t there I go again with the acronyms)

What is it TNBD (that’s one acronym I love using…. Tim Nice But Dim)? Is it a Bengali bloke had an affair with your wife, dated your daughter perhaps, or got a promotion over you, has to be something for you to carry that big ‘chicken tikka’ on your shoulder, tikka that could catch on too.

What is it TNBD that gets your moobs about us, do you perhaps live next door to one who drives a nice car compared to yours, has a nicer house… no doubt all on benefits.

I know you love reading my comments because if you remember sonny tim, you made a promise some time ago to yourself that you will never converse with some, clearly, I get on your moobs enough for you to keep coming for more!

I look forward to your racist rants also… filled with statistics that you could only get from reading the BNP/EDL website.

LMAO ROLF at the fact that TNBD is a complete numpty (aaaahh felt good to get all that text speak out)